As of late, I have been reading of different threads. I think its interesting how different the views are when it comes to Martina Hingis. Besides her dominant 1997 season, she was pretty inconsistent there after (by her standards), suggesting she was nothing but a place holder in the changing of the guards from the Seles/Graf generation to the WS/Daveport power era. So my question is: Do you feel Martina is overrated?

No because her achievements came from her talents alone. If anything Martina's an underachiever because her ego and poor commitment ultimately stopped her from overcoming significant road blocks.

1)She had an innate sense of good court positioning.
2)She had good hands in the sense, she could control the ball really well.
3)Her shot making skills were advanced beyond her years.

The Bad :-

1)She however wasn't an athlete and more importantly showed no desire to whip herself up upto the standards required ala Henin .
2)Her strokes lacked raquet head speed to compensate for her lack of power.
3)Her quick rise to the top, didn't allow to take in the difficult lessons all great players have to learn in order to win in the long run i.e how to deal with stress when things are not going your way, when to make changes when, what you are doing is not giving you the results, how to deal with failures etc etc..
5)She took things for granted and ignored the reality around her during the critical 97-99 period. She could not gauge that her competition were taller, stronger and more athletic than she was and they would soon surpass her if she didn't hit the gym.

As one can see the Bad outnumber the Good. At the end of the day it's all very sad. Goes to show early promise of talent does not necessarily deliver results in the long run.

Talent doesn't make you a great champion.
Hard work, perseverance and strength of will are all as important as talent.

That's why Hingis will never be considered on the same level of Venus, Henin, or Serena.

This. This. This.

If talent was the only barometer of status, Patty Schnyder would've been considered the all-time GOAT. Talent is just the basis of a great champion. Hingis fans acknowledging that Hingis was lazy and unmotivated proves that her status in her game will always be less than those who adapted, improved and willed themselves to become better players through a steady ethic.

No one should say Hingis is underrated because she was lazy. If that was the case, then she deserves to be. No one wins brownie points for not realising their own potential due to self-induced apathy.

Hingis was a better player than Venus, and she was capable of winning 3 of 4 Grand Slams, and be like 4 years more at number 1 than what Venus was, and she was immensely more talented than Venus. That's better than 2 Grand Slams.

Hingis was a better player than Venus, and she was capable of winning 3 of 4 Grand Slams, and be like 4 years more at number 1 than what Venus was, and she was immensely more talented than Venus. That's better than 2 Grand Slams.

I think it's pointless to argue with some people. Hingis was one of the best players during the entire 1996-2002 period. Some of these years were amazing, some were just very good. By 2002, she had already played for 20 years (started at 2). The girl was burnt out.

While the other girls worked like crazy to catch up with her slam count or weeks at No. 1 (she's still comfortably fourth after Evert), the girl was happily riding her horses in the woods around her mansion near Zurich living off interest and not needing tennis at all.

It doesn't matter if she was good enough to win more Slams than Venus. The fact is she didn't.

The fact is Hingis was 200 weeks more at number 1 than Venus, the fact is Hingis has 10 more Tier I titles than Venus, the fact is Hingis has won virtually everything (Grand Slams, all Tier I's, YEC...) except Roland Garros and that Venus was only able to win 2 of the 4 Grand Slams.

Hingis was a better player than Venus, and she was capable of winning 3 of 4 Grand Slams, and be like 4 years more at number 1 than what Venus was, and she was immensely more talented than Venus. That's better than 2 Grand Slams.

That's a mighty bold statement, and highly debatable. You should have concluded that declaration with ..."in my opinion".
And "no", I won't debate you on that topic, because it has nothing to do with the thread topic and has already been debated to death.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Petronius

I think it's pointless to argue with some people. Hingis was one of the best players during the entire 1996-2002 period. Some of these years were amazing, some were just very good. By 2002, she had already played for 20 years (started at 2). The girl was burnt out.

While the other girls worked like crazy to catch up with her slam count or weeks at No. 1 (she's still comfortably fourth after Evert), the girl was happily riding her horses in the woods around her mansion near Zurich living off interest and not needing tennis at all.

This is yet another example of inflating and embellishing of Hingis' achievements that isn't necessary. As again, her achievements and accomplishments speak for themselves.
And btw, there is really no need to inflate the length of time she played tennis, nor was she "burned out".
As far as what was been widely reported, her departure from tennis was NOT due to burnout. And by now everyone knows the reasons, so I won't recap the sad story, as I still respect her as a tennis great.

__________________Be peaceful, be courteous, obey the law, respect everyone; but if someone puts his hand on you, send him to the cemetery. -Malcolm XA man who stands for nothing will fall for anything. -Malcolm XOur greatest glory is not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall. -ConfuciusThe greatest scholars are not usually the wisest people. - Geoffrey Chaucer

As far as what was been widely reported, her departure from tennis was NOT due to burnout. And by now everyone knows the reasons, so I won't recap the sad story, as I still respect her as a tennis great.

I'm not sure what you're getting at with this reply to my post. Plus, I didn't use any "capital letters".
WTH!!

But you act as if she could never play tennis again.
She plays WTT and is still quite formidable.
Even before that, she made a comeback after a 2+ year retirement and did quite well in 2010 and 2011, for someone you claim was "heavily injured".
You need to do the necessary research before making such unsubstantiated statements.

She simply couldnotcompetewiththenewstyleoftennis being played.

There's no need to feel ashamed of that fact because it happens to great players all the time.
The other top WTA players at the time of her return simply surpassed her level of play.

Where is all this imaginary stuff coming from????

Quote:

Originally Posted by NashaMasha

no Olympic Medals , no French Open title

Exactly!

The imaginary stuff, inflation of achievements, and embellishments seem to have no end.

__________________Be peaceful, be courteous, obey the law, respect everyone; but if someone puts his hand on you, send him to the cemetery. -Malcolm XA man who stands for nothing will fall for anything. -Malcolm XOur greatest glory is not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall. -ConfuciusThe greatest scholars are not usually the wisest people. - Geoffrey Chaucer

I'm not pulling facts out of a hat here, Timariot.
Okay, just look at Hingis' slam record from 1999 to 2002, "Grand Slam singles finals" heading.She lost every single slam she entered during that time period, where she played the likes of Graf, Davenport, Serena, and Capriati:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martina_Hingis

Now are you trying to honestly tell me that there wasn't an obvious problem with "the genius" Hingis?
Come on now, just look at her win/loss stat between 1999 and 2002.

I'm sorry, what the hell is your point again? Of course if you carefully select a period to suit your argument you can prove anything. Hey, how many Slam finals Venus won in 1997-99? Gee, whatta sucky player.

Why don't you try this: between 1997 and 2001, Hingis won most tournaments, spend most times as #1, made most Slam finals and coincidentally, also won most Slam finals of all the players even though it involves two whole years when she won no Slams at all, so you can't accuse me of cherrypicking! Sure, she may not have been "dominant" over that entire period, but clearly her results were the best.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RVD

This tells me, and everyone else who watched tennis during that time, that Hingis got waxed shamelessly by these great returners, and heavy hitters.

Yep, she so shamelessly waxed Venus 6-1 6-1 in AO semifinal, when Venus was at her absolute career peak. Did you watch that?

Quote:

Originally Posted by RVD

I think it's very disingenuous of you to pretend that the question weren't clear enough, or that you don't have the stats, when you are clearly a huge Hingis fan.

What, you seriously expect me to maintain some sort of stats database?

__________________"Backhands should be hit with two hands, as should forehands. A Selesian's strength flows from the Holy Groundstrokes, but beware: sliced backhands, Graf forehands - the dark side of Selesianity are they. Easily they flow, but if once you start down the dark path, forever will Graf damnate your destiny - consume you she will..."